Jump to content

User talk:NicAgent

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

NicAgent (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Ok, now for the real truth this time. I have a sinister brother, and at times he has gotten onto this account, or vandalized with other accounts, including the "Railers". I am completely not him, and given that CheckUser goes by finding accounts that used the same IP addresses, I feel that this block is completely unfair. Should you not offer any explanation and protect this page, I will have to use a sockpuppet to figure this out. Keep in mind that since I live in the same house as my brother, we thus share the same IP address. Thanks in advance -

Decline reason:

No unbelieveable I'm afraid, one of the accounts you have already admitted as being created by you (and indeed the log shows) was an attack on me (User:Pgk), now I have had nothing to do with you upto that point, I had however blocked and protected a lot of the socks, if the socks aren't you but your brothers, why are you creating an attack account? BTW the excuse about being a younger sibling is about the oldest in the book, dog ate your homework next?

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

NicAgent (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I never created any of the "Railer" accounts - I'm sorry if it doesn't comprehend to you, but I don't recall ever using any of them - or most of the others, quite frankly

Decline reason:

Interesting that you knew which accounts I was refering to, If you can't remember your own actions then you are certainly too dangerous to be here

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Well you should have thought of that before creating all of them, using them for vandalism, page move vandalism, personal attacks and so on. I think it's unfair that I an many admins had to clean up your mess. No unblock. --pgk(talk) 18:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It sure looks like Image:Tire burnout.jpg is copyrighted by strangevehicles.com. Do you have any evidence that it isn't? Please see Wikipedia:Image use policy. Melchoir 00:37, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Free will man/woman

[edit]

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages. The notices and comments are needed to establish community consensus about the status of an article, and removing them is considered vandalism. If you oppose its deletion, you may comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. --howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 07:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some questions

[edit]

Follow the links to the answers.

1. What happens if an Administrator abuses his priveleges; i.e. vandalizes articles, blocks users unnecessarily or arbitrarily deletes articles?

WP:ADMIN#Administrator abuse

2. Why do some people call Wikipedia "communism"?

Wikipedia:Replies to common objections#Communism

3. How are vandal bots created?

WP:BOTS

Also, your talk page is not the best place for to ask such questions. Talk pages are for personal questions. For instance, if you have any further questions regarding my answers above, please leave a message on my talk page. Your talk page is the place for other Wikipedians to ask questions of you. You might try the Wikipedia:Help desk if you have any other questions regarding the workings of Wikipedia; or, of course, you may ask me.-- Rmrfstar 16:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry; but I just felt that the user talk page was best. Thanks for answering the questions though.

Don't worry about it; no harm was done. Also, you might be interested to know that to insert an automatic signature, just type ~~~~. -- Rmrfstar 02:41, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, thanks for the tip! I see now that Wikipedia just made links with underlines...NicAgent 03:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CSD

[edit]

Hi,

The criteria allowed for speedy deletion are all spelled out in WP:CSD. You can't make up additional rules on your own - have a look at the CSD talk page and you'll see trying to get new criteria improved is very difficult. The only time an AfD turns into a speedy delete is when people in the AfD discussion call specifically for a speedy delete, based on those criteria. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And while I'm explaining things... please don't create test pages in the main article namespace, like you did with KNNN (which I've since deleted). If you need to create a test page, make it a sub-page of your user page, like User:NicAgent/KNNN. Thanks. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Devin_Moore.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags.

It is from here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/04/60minutes/main678261.shtml NicAgent 21:40, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nimp.org

[edit]

Yeah, that's a nasty javascript, it's gotten me in the past too. Admins are watching and blocking these guys eventually, though. - Jersyko talk 02:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Image Tagging Image:GTAmovie 1.jpg

[edit]
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:GTAmovie 1.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Dethomas 23:21, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


In response to your request at User_talk:Dethomas#About_Image:GTAmovie1.jpg, here's what I think you need to do:
1) Add the {{Film-screenshot}} tag, source information, and a fair use rational on the image description page, and
2) Cite fair use in the articles that use the image.
The practical effect of item (1) means adding this text to Image:GTAmovie_1.jpg:
== Licensing ==

{{Film-Screenshot}}

Taken from the DVD edition of the 1977 film Grand Theft Auto through WinDVD's photo snapping feature.

== Fair use for [[Grand Theft Auto (film)]] == 

This image, GTAMovie_1.jpg, is used in [[Grand Theft Auto (film)]] to illustrate the Radio DJ character played by [[Don Steele]]. 
I (~~~) feel it is covered by United States fair use laws because: 
# it is a low resolution copy of a single frame of the film used in a description of that film.
# it does not limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the film in any way. 
# copies of this image could not be used to make illegal copies of the film.


In practice, item (2) means adding this text to Grand Theft Auto (film):
<!-- FAIR USE of GTAMovi1.jpg: see image description page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:GTAmovie_1.jpg for rationale -->


And that's it. If you want more some background on image usage, copyright and tagging on Wikipedia, here's a link or three that might be useful:
Regards, Dethomas 18:08, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The history of Punta Arenas, Chile

[edit]

The way you copyied and pasted the material from Punta Arenas, Chile to Punta Arenas -- that is not the best way to do a merge. It is strongly discouraged. The Punta Arenas page is not only shorter, but it has a shorter history of edits. It hasn't really changed much, since it was first written.

The longer article, on the other hand, has a long history of edits.

People sometimes need to look at the history of edits, to see how an article evolved. The way you copied all the material from another article complicates access to the edit history.

  • Access to the edit history is important if someone claims or substantiates that an article contains copyrighted material that is not liscenced under a free liscense, like the GFDL.
  • Access to the edit history is important if someone suggests that material is incorrect, or was hidden vandalism.
  • Sometimes people like to see that the record of their contributions. Everyone who contributes to wikipedia is a volunteer. The least we can do is allow those contributors to take credit for their contributions. The way things stand now it looks like you wrote the whole thing. That is not right.

If [[Punta Arenas]] hadn't already existed you could have used the move tab. As it is though, you should have requested the help of an administrator to swap the names of the two articles, so that the main edit history stayed with the main article.

I think you jumped the gun. Zero people supported the idea of a merge.

You are incorrect to assert that articles about other cities never include the larger geographical area they are found in: See:

Note the articles on Santiago and Halifax.

Punta Arenas, Chile is not the only Punta Arenas. There is:

-- Geo Swan 04:37, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration Request Procedure

[edit]

In the future, please remember to copy the Arbitration Request template first before listing the details. This will prevent confusion with the template later on. --TML1988 05:52, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Kirk_Pride.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Image legality questions. 10:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:CTtpke1.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:CTtpke1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:CTtpke2.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:CTtpke2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:02, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:WiC.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:WiC.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:08, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Wilbur_Cross.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diane Keaton

[edit]

Hi,

I removed the vandal disclaimer you put in... the problem is, that sort of wording reads more like a challenge to vandals, that is, it's more likely to incite them rather than to discourage them. -- Curps 05:27, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hammer and Sickle

[edit]

My apologies. I changed the image not because of how it looked, but because of the format. PNG, GIF, and JPEG images are raster images (two-dimensional pixel maps), but SVG is a vector image format (made from geometric shapes which can be scaled easily). I was not aware of the visiual differences between the two, nor upon noticing them, was I aware that they represented anything significant other than the stylistic choices of their respective artists. As well, the coloring of Image:Hammer and sickle.png is hacked on (the anti-aliasing around the golden elements is designed for a lighter shade of red). In addition, the page for Image:Hammer and sickle.png labels it as redundant to Image:Hammer and sickle.svg. If it is such an important issue, then it would be advisable to modify the SVG version or create a new SVG image, as the format is more suited to logos, symbols, emblems, flags, diagrams, etc. than raster formats.—Kbolino 17:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SAT

[edit]

The word name of the test is no longer official; everyone knows it as the SAT. Georgia guy 00:47, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, NEVER do a cut and paste move again. It's not good(TM) since it screws up the edit history and just creates a mess for admins to clean up. —Nightstallion (?) 07:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latest vote

[edit]

You did not post your AfD correctly. Just wanted to let you know! =) WP:AfD --mboverload 02:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:DevoMoore.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:DevoMoore.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

RfA

[edit]

Hi, the user has to accept the nomination before listing it. Please give them some time to accept and ideally to answer the questions. They may want to read through the administrators reading list and RfA advice before accepting and answering the questions. Also place the voting template and the standard questions in the nom. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/nominate for specific instructions. - Taxman Talk 21:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: {{Communism}} template

[edit]

Please do not continue to unilaterally insert your {{Communism2}} template into the communism article, for both I and 172 have explicitly expressed our disapproval of the vivid template, while others have done so through their edits. In accordance with Wikipedia's consensus-building guideline, you should request and heed the opinions of other editors when such a dispute arises. Feel free to propose your template on the talk page of Communism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Thanks. -- WGee 04:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may be proud of your template, but that does not mean you should ignore the concerns of other editors. This template fuss isn't the end of the world, but I'd appreciate it if you could keep in mind Wikipedia's consensus-building guideline. Remember, this is a community project. -- WGee 19:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:UT2004Onslaught.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:UT2004Onslaught.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Sad I've withdrawn

[edit]

Thanks. We'll talk about it in a few months... -- Rmrfstar 00:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Wii

[edit]

Why did you request that this article be deleted so that Wii could be moved to it? This has been debated before, and it was agreed that the article would remain as Wii. -- VederJuda 02:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the consensus of a recent pagemove proposal was Not Moved. --Stratadrake 03:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Wii/Move to Nintendo Wii

License tagging for Image:FatManWalking.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:FatManWalking.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:MP3.1.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:MP3.1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:OriginalMediaPlayer2.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:OriginalMediaPlayer2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 13:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:StratfordPd64.jpg

[edit]

Please add a license tag to this image. Since you made it yourself, consider using {{no rights reserved}} or {{GFDL-self}}. Thanks. --tomf688 (talk - email) 02:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Charlemagne on WP:FAC

[edit]

Hi, Nicholas. I appreciate your interest in the Featured article process, but you say in your nomination of Charlemagne that you haven't checked the article for flaws, "but its extreme length definitely makes it quality". I'm sorry, but that nomination reason suggests to me that you haven't studied the FAC criteria, or even that your nomination may be a joke. Perhaps you would like to de-list it? It has already gotten some "Opposes", and no support. Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 14:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

That's fine, I'll remove it, then. Thanks. Bishonen | talk 18:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Virgin Atlantic

[edit]

The reason I removed what you added is that the Norwalk facility is only the United States's regional headquarters of Virgin Atlantic. It would not be fair, in my opinion, to neglect the other regional headquarters as if to say that the United States one is more important.

(!(@

[edit]

What was up with this article? It seemed like pure nonsense to me. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:41, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh darn it, if you're going to create nonsense articles just because you're bored, at least have the decency to do it by means of a sockpuppet, and call it NicAgent on wheels! CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 20:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blockage

[edit]
This user has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, per ruling of administrators, Jimbo Wales and/or the Arbitration Committee. See block log.

Naconkantari 21:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you create an abusively named sockpuppet? Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 21:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No one is perfect and I was bored - I also didn't see how the logs actually registered it, to be honest. --NicAgent 21:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I see you created a nonsense article yesterday because you were bored. If I unblock you will you disrupt more? Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 21:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well no - considering how I see what could happen - but I really think it was creating that abusive sockpuppet that ultimately killed me. I probably should be blocked for a limited period of time, but not indefinitely - as you can see I've actually amassed many good contribuions. --NicAgent 21:55, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you have, but you can't piss about here. The project is too big, too serious, too important. The are lots of ther places - like Uncyclopedia, where you can you to have a bit of fun. Actually you can have fun here, but not by doing things in the article space or by overstepping the line by creating socks etc. Let me have a word vwith the admin who blocked you, I'll see what I can do. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Sounds good. Because really, a user should not be indefinitely blocked who has amassed at least some good contributions. --NicAgent 22:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's the sockpuppet thing. We really do take that very seriously. Anyway I'm going to undo the indefinate block. I'm discussing if a temp block is still needed. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your consideration. Yes, I do deserve to be blocked for a limited period, so you should probably block me for like a week or something. But nontheless I thank you for being considerate to me. --NicAgent 22:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock denied. You seem to regard this all as some kind of game. On the one hand you have some good contributions. On the other hand, you've used dozens of vandalism-only sockpuppets, including at least one page-move vandal. This wastes everyone's time. Mackensen (talk) 22:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm I see. Well in that case I agree with my fellow admin. You need to find another site to play in. This is a serious project. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So I'll never be able to edit again? I really think that a few lapses over hundreds of contributions does not constitute being forever banished. And User:Mackensen, what proof do you have that I have used all of those sockpuppets? --NicAgent 22:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mackensian has access to the website logs. Everything you do he is visible. Page move vandalism is beyond the pale - it's not a "lapse". I'm off to be bed now. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well before you go, just remove the content on my user page. I have no need for it anymore being as its all over for me. --NicAgent 22:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK I'm happy to oblige. You can still edit this talk page, use that wisely. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good work. But add {{indefblock}} to that --NicAgent 22:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few lapses

[edit]

A few lapses? I think you underestimate your boredom. Allow me to refresh your memory; heaven knows I couldn't keep track of all these, were I you.

Vandalism-only sockpuppets

Now, I suppose that this might seem very amusing to you; I really don't know. The hours spent clearing up after your messes lessens the humor value I'm afraid. Unblock denied, in perpetuity. Mackensen (talk) 22:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So what? You might just be saying this to back up the statement that I should be blocked for the one sockpuppet you KNOW (and I know) I used - User:Pgk - FUCK FUCKERS - ON WHEELS!. Sure, there is a program of CheckUser, but what proof do you have that what you have above is all true? I don't recall using any of those names. --NicAgent 22:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
An image that you uploaded, Image:NYT91201.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

This is a high--resolution reproduction of copyrighted work by the The New York Times. Thanks, GChriss 03:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]
An image that you uploaded, Image:RellTakesOver.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Hyphen5 01:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Only warning

[edit]

Template:Only warning has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. MBisanz talk 07:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:RellTakesOver.jpg

[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:RellTakesOver.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Theft Auto wanted star system listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Grand Theft Auto wanted star system. Since you had some involvement with the Grand Theft Auto wanted star system redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Lordtobi (✉) 17:09, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NicAgent&oldid=1256565083"